From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D11C2D0E8 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 00:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EDCB206E6 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 00:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="bdxLoqgs" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727650AbgC0ALe (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:11:34 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com ([209.85.208.193]:45910 "EHLO mail-lj1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726067AbgC0ALe (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:11:34 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id t17so8398112ljc.12 for ; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 17:11:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Om0czkdlZ/W7CWzm10Sp8n/DnGjyBb+31UnGPUf/8ao=; b=bdxLoqgsqXEsawKrEEQCjxEEU4SVqGM7oftF1iV9Uv3/ABxpystWJhynlOqOLrU4Hi hx6k8DReGKF6ijQ3b+bSrJfho9k8R8jP3/0xDRIAzQzUadL9wUHkv+yI5J5m8czH9knK d8NtmT64PYlpoxQR0zgJLnadnFbDL9hsxNndQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Om0czkdlZ/W7CWzm10Sp8n/DnGjyBb+31UnGPUf/8ao=; b=iW9TMMbhaqZQJO/QfJxYEWHkufY6MYcM7Iyd2ZN+/OF6mtP9SCKDqqdr9QIZUTp4TG iUxj7cbwH2Yi/aGzB01K54yZRkeL8yOe5d2xibBlLeJH4elO2InVz7MerX9A+vD4q3GQ odQXy44F6DVJ7VTcWUem1nE4qJRJUK3Qhxbiq+9KeNtTGLDLiLjVlHFBc9Zj/Pfe7rUJ spuX2lNbfaRvNmqUX39wqJaKwrGWnxo1QWDIw8bImEs+Che9vgQ4wXBOE25JDoCvIJUB ta07g0u+JH1CVTvT8KKktfdeR086QPMnY8q7Jqcc8qr8JxXUb34XbiumB/cmktnpe4nS alHg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ13583/2AaV4C4JyH0S1UQEU7/+GMUPuk6kfDp+1Npm8gB1iEpy /fopgHnADeMoKdJIL9OFLwUXzwXd8clXRHgg0BVVDg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsUOMh8Po1kt6T0m/lsy5OkGbexpu112fy3gnBAGNzZ5mv6hf9SyERLmZOD9NOtJV13YX15ZgAmSTIvz0Xi+fg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9ad2:: with SMTP id p18mr6574780ljj.15.1585267892097; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 17:11:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200326075938.65053-1-mcchou@chromium.org> <20200326005931.v3.1.I0e975833a6789e8acc74be7756cd54afde6ba98c@changeid> <0cb96a93000c02e4c4816c64492afef10bc76fd9.camel@perches.com> In-Reply-To: <0cb96a93000c02e4c4816c64492afef10bc76fd9.camel@perches.com> From: Miao-chen Chou Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 17:11:21 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Bluetooth: btusb: Indicate Microsoft vendor extension for Intel 9460/9560 and 9160/9260 To: Joe Perches Cc: Bluetooth Kernel Mailing List , Marcel Holtmann , Alain Michaud , Luiz Augusto von Dentz , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Johan Hedberg , LKML , netdev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 1:16 AM Joe Perches wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-03-26 at 00:59 -0700, Miao-chen Chou wrote: > > This adds a bit mask of driver_info for Microsoft vendor extension and > > indicates the support for Intel 9460/9560 and 9160/9260. See > > https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/bluetooth/ > > microsoft-defined-bluetooth-hci-commands-and-events for more information > > about the extension. This was verified with Intel ThunderPeak BT controller > > where msft_vnd_ext_opcode is 0xFC1E. > [] > > diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci_core.h > [] > > @@ -414,6 +414,8 @@ struct hci_dev { > > void *smp_data; > > void *smp_bredr_data; > > > > + void *msft_ext; > > Why should this be a void * and not a msft_vnd_ext * ? The intention is to hide msft_vnd_ext from the driver.